The October 7 Jihad: A Test for the West

For the enemies of the United States, Hamas’s brutal October 7, 2023, massacre of 1200 Israelis and foreign nationals in Southern Israel and the kidnapping of some 250 hostages, was not merely a mass atrocity against Israel. Rather, it was an Islamist jihad that instrumentalized “Palestinianism” and triggered a global assault uniting Islamists and radical activists worldwide.¹ This calculated act of “Red-Green Alliance” terror and subversion exposed what many in Washington’s policy circles were hard-pressed to grasp: that the American-Israel relationship constitutes the West’s frontline defense against an axis of jihadist and authoritarian forces determined to dismantle the liberal democratic order, a relationship the October 7 atrocities sought to uproot.

October 7 destroyed the myth that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict was political in nature and solvable by territorial compromise. Hamas taught us that the United States, Israel, and the West were all on their target list. Hamas’s “Al Aqsa Flood” was the culmination of 100 years of Palestinian Islamism, originated by the first British-appointed Palestinian Arab leader, Haj Amin Al Husseini, the “Grand Mufti of Jerusalem” who collaborated with Adolf Hitler to execute the “Final Solution” in the Holy Land. Haj Amin established the path to the October 7 massacre, through his “Al Aqsa is in danger” libel, igniting the deadly anti-Jewish jihadi pogroms in the Land of Israel in the 1920s and 1930s.

The al Aqsa brand reemerged over the last century. Hamas and other Palestinian factions actively participated in the Second Intifada, “the Al Aqsa Intifada,” a term coined by Palestinian Authority and Palestine Liberation Organization Chairman Yasser Arafat, whose “Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade” was the jihadist armed wing of his Fatah faction. Similarly, Hamas’s sponsor, the Islamic Republic of Iran, is dedicated to “liberating” Jerusalem from the Jews: it sponsors Al Quds day on university campuses worldwide, centering al Aqsa’s religious symbolism and motivation, not political conflict.

Historian Victor Davis Hanson has documented the ideological underpinnings of the Red-Green Alliance. Hanson identified campus protests in support of Hamas as fundamentally anti-American, tracing them to postcolonial and neo-Marxist university curricula that systematically portray both the United States and Israel as “oppressors” in a global narrative of colonial exploitation.² This narrative has cast the United States and Israel as settler-colonial oppressors of indigenous populations, delegitimizing their sovereignty as “born in sin.”

This globalized “good and evil” narrative has spread across hundreds of university campuses and American cities. Demonstrations celebrating Hamas’s atrocities represent symptoms of a deeper civilizational crisis. Demonstrators chanting in favor of a U.S.-designated terrorist organization, while demonizing America’s steadfast democratic ally, is a result of American universities’ systematic undermining of support for the U.S.-Israel alliance through post–colonialist frameworks. These frameworks have weakened American domestic security, subverted its population, and encouraged antisemitism, precipitating societal decay and division. The speed with which American institutions mobilized to justify Hamas’s atrocities, the systematic harassment of Jewish students, and the celebration of terrorist violence in American streets revealed how deeply the “globalize the intifada” strategy had already penetrated Western societies.³

The Iranian regime’s financial, military, and propaganda orchestration of October 7 through its Hamas and Islamic Jihad proxies, as well as other Hizbullah and Houthi proxy attacks on Israel, reveals a coordinated assault. Iran’s theocratic system, built on genocidal antisemitism and imperial ambitions, has methodically constructed a global empire that now spans South American narcoterrorism and Shiite da’wa (missionizing) to military meddling in Africa. Iran’s modern version of the Nazi Third Reich is designed to destroy Israel as the first step in dismantling American influence globally, and ultimately challenge Western civilization itself.⁴

Iran’s proxy network, extending from Gaza through Lebanon to Syria, Iraq, and Yemen, represents a coordinated challenge to American strategic interests that cannot be addressed through traditional diplomatic means. The Abraham Accords’ strategic framework means economic integration with Gulf partners, providing America with alternative energy supplies and investment opportunities. The Accords’ security cooperation enables coordinated defense against Iranian proxy attacks. Houthi strikes on Saudi Arabia’s Abqaiq oil facilities and recent attacks on UAE ports demonstrate the shared threat that binds these partners together against Tehran’s destabilization campaign.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) structure constitutes a foundational threat to the American-Israeli partnership. The American-Israeli counterattack against Iranian nuclear and ballistic installations was supported by America’s Gulf Allies as well, an expression of regional support for the U.S.-Israel relationship. When Iran launched massive missile and drone assaults against Israel in April and October 2024, Arab partners effectively supported Israeli defense efforts – the UAE shared critical intelligence on missile trajectories, Bahrain coordinated naval interceptions, Morocco provided satellite imagery, and even Saudi Arabia shared radar data and intercepted projectiles.⁵ In the subsequent June 2025 war, Arab allies stepped up once again, playing a role in countering Iranian ballistic missiles and killer drones.

The post-October 7 threats described above have tested both the Biden and Trump administrations. Hamas’s propaganda, promoted and distributed via Qatar, Turkey, Russia, and China, broadcast by the global Left, has swayed both American presidential administrations to level criticism on Israel over Gaza’s humanitarian crisis, regardless of Israel’s provision of more than two million tons of aid. Both administrations have called for humanitarian pauses and ceasefires, which benefit Hamas’s strategy and put pressure on Israel.

Trump’s insistence to end the war with Hamas as soon as possible reflects the larger vision laid out in the Abraham Accords of his first term. The Accords position the Saudi-led Gulf States as an economic and political anchor and an essential component of the new Middle East. Trump’s May 2025 visit to the Middle East and his pocketing of several trillion dollars in Gulf commitments to the American economy reflected this framework as a cornerstone of an “America First” geopolitical strategy. In short, Trump has sought to establish American primacy in the Middle East through economic partnerships and security cooperation between the United States, Israel, and West-friendly Gulf states.

The United States, though, under both Biden and Trump, has faced major power competition. Other global powers have challenged American hegemony in Israel and the Gulf. During Biden’s presidency, Washington misread the shifting dynamics of the Middle East. Biden’s chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan in August 2021 further deepened Gulf skepticism of U.S. reliability. The hasty exit left behind collapsing Afghan institutions, scenes of desperation at Kabul airport, and within days, the Taliban back in control after 20 years of war.⁶ Notably, former Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh said of the event, “The demise of the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan is a prelude to the demise of the Israeli occupation of the land of Palestine.”⁷

Biden’s retreat was a strategic blunder. More consequentially, it was a symbolic gift to extremist Islam, illustrating that insurgents could roll back American power with patience and ideological drive. The U.S. withdrawal reinforced perceptions that Biden’s America was unwilling to sustain commitments to allies, weakening deterrence against Iran and empowering radical actors across the region.

By 2023, it was clear that Biden lacked a strategic vision and a basic cultural understanding of Middle East geopolitics. He publicly accused and humiliated the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman over the Khashoggi affair. Biden attempted to revive the Iran nuclear deal and undermined the trust of his Gulf allies. Biden’s KSA rift was reflected in the Saudi refusal to increase oil production during the Russia-Ukraine war to offset supply losses. Instead, Riyadh doubled down on OPEC+ cooperation with Moscow.

China also stepped into this vacuum, mediating a Saudi–Iran rapprochement in 2023. Beijing presented itself as a pragmatic power focused on energy security and stability, while the U.S. appeared distracted by Ukraine and overconfident in its leverage. From Riyadh’s perspective, Biden had betrayed the traditional “oil for security” bargain, misjudging both MBS’s resolve and the region’s readiness to diversify its alliances.

China also courted Israel to join its Belt and Road Initiative in the 2010s, a direct challenge to America. Today, Beijing’s ultimate objective is securing backdoor access to Israeli military innovations developed through American investment and collaboration. The Chinese operation of Haifa’s port – which simultaneously serves as a critical U.S. Navy docking facility – exemplifies the security dilemma.

In light of the larger power politics described above, October 7 was a stress test for the entire region and the Abraham normalization agreements. Yet, rather than crumbling under pressure, the Accords proved surprisingly resilient.

The United States’ greatest challenge lies in reading the regional and international ally-adversary configuration correctly. In this sense, an Israeli victory over Hamas constitutes an American victory over an axis of anti-Western adversaries determined to capture and reshape the Middle East and the international order. The importance of defending Western values of freedom and democracy, leveraging technological advancements, and forging strategic partnerships has never been more important. This dual test – both the military-terror and the ideological threat to Israel and the U.S.-led Western alliance – and the West’s response to it will determine whether the liberal international order survives the 21st century.

In the final analysis, Israel plays an indispensable role in securing the international order. John Spencer, chair of Urban Warfare Studies at West Point, has written, “Israel is on the front line of the war against Islamic extremism, and every battle it fights provides lessons that the U.S. can apply….Israel stands as the bulwark against Islamic extremism’s assault on the West. U.S. backing yields dividends in intelligence that foils plots at home and abroad, ensuring our security without direct involvement.”⁸

* * *

Notes